摘要
「中華民國通識教育學會」主辦，並由「弘光科技大學通識教育中心」承辦之「通識教育教師研習會」，以「大學通識教育中的主體性與群體性」為題。此次研討會的意義是顯著的，藉著這個主題的討論，一方面對相關問題作學理上的探討，另一方面對台灣當前的時弊也有對治之意義。本文乃屬於主題中有關「理念與目的」之子題，題為〈「群己權界」的哲學分析〉。「群」對應於本研討會主題中的「群體性」，「己」就是「主體」，「權界」則分別指「主體」與「群體」的權限。本文乃從哲學的進路，以分析「群己權界」（主體與群體）的本質意義，雖不敢有匡正時弊之想，卻期待有助於增強吾人對當前台灣社會的倫理、政治、社會與值價觀等的反思。本文從下述五個層面來闡述「群己權界」問題：（1）首先，為了說明倫理道德與社會哲學在通識教育中的逼切性，吾人針對近年來台灣社會的道德與政治現象，作了展示與反思，作為本文的引言。（2）第二個層面是對「主體」的分析，此處的「主體」是指「德性主體」（ moralsubject），是從吾人的價值自覺中朗現出來的。「主體」的概念不但表明吾人自覺到「自我」與「客體」之間有別，而且也意識人之本質、人之價值、及人之尊嚴等。「主體」的權限是以行為的正當性（righteousness）為基礎，這在「個人」便道德，而從社會或人際關係上說，則稱為「倫理」。針對這個問題，吾人先從「德性的優先性」問題開始，進而展示德國哲學家康德之「責任」與「目的性王國」的理念，從而說明吾人作為「德性主體」之意義。繼而吾人將又從孔子所謂「仁心」，及孟子所謂「性善」說，來說明「德性自覺」與「德性實踐」的可能性。在哲學意義上，這個層面其實就是德性倫理（moral-ethical）問題。（3）第三個層面是針對「群體」作分析，它主要是指社會而言，其權限所涉及的重要概念是國家、法治及民主。對於這些理念，吾人從黑格爾（F. Hegel）的《法權哲學》、邊泌（J. Bentham）的「功利主義原則」（principle of utility）、孟德斯鳩的《法意》、盧梭《社會契約論》，及穆勒等的《論自由》等等政治哲學提出分析。在哲學意義上，這個層面其實就是社會哲學（包括法權哲學與政治哲學）的問題。（4）第四個層面是闡述「主體」與「群體」之間的相互關係及其權限，這可包括權利、人權、公民權、責任（義務）、自由等。針對這些概念，吾人分析洛克的「自然權利不可轉讓」說、盧梭的「人民主權」說、康德的「國家公民」說、穆勒的「自由」說、及海耶克（Hayek）對「平等權」等。在哲學意義上，這個層面其實就是「法權哲學」與「政治哲學」問題。（5）最後，吾人在「結語」部份特別對近年來，台灣一些政客把「民主」視為「主權在民」之說作反思，並依穆勒及海耶克的社會哲學提出批評，指出當前台灣社會所謂民主，其實只是多數人的政治而已。這樣的民主易生「多數暴政」，故台灣的民主乃待提昇。當前社會紛亂，道德倫理己瀕趨於崩潰，而司法的獨立性又未能完全讓吾人信賴，社會上只見高亢的民粹與政治權力的運作，「正義社會」待造。在殿語中，吾人特別強調：眾多主體的行為最終必成歷史的「業果」，因此，吾人一方面不僅要背負「歷史的承擔」，也要承受「歷史的懲罰」，而在另一方面，也能為歷史開創新運。這就是「主體在客體中的責任」，而唯有在「責任的自覺」與「責任的承擔」中，吾人才能開顯「主體性」，開拓歷史的新機運。
關鍵字
無資料並列摘要
This paper entitled ”The Limits of individual Liberty and of governmental Authority with regard to the mutual Relation between Subjectivity and Community” was presented at the conference on the topic ”The Conceptions of Subjectivity and Community in General Education” held on December 2 at Hungkwang University of Technology. It consists of 5 parts and their basic concepts are as follows:(1) Firstly, in order to show that ethics and social philosophy are requisite for general education, we expound and evaluate the moral and political phenomena occurred in recent years in Taiwanese society as an introduction to this paper.(2) Secondly, the conception of subjectivity from the ethical perspective is analyzed. The fact that we have moral consciousness reveals the reality of self- consciousness of oneself which can be regarded as moral subject. Morality is of great significance in the sense that it has priority over all other values. The subjectivity of moral subject is the foundation of ethics and its essential elements are treated by Confucius, Mencius and Kant as sense of benevolence, good will and practical reason respectively.(3) Thirdly, the essential idea of community is ”society” and the conceptual components of modern society are citizenship, democracy, legislation, government under laws, etc. They are the basic elements of social philosophy, and we expound all these concepts in the light of a critical exposition of Hegel's Rechtphilosophie, Montesquieu's De l'esprit des Lois , J.J.Rousseau's Social Contract, J. Bentham's principle of utility, J. S. Mill's theory of liberty, and F. A. Hayek's individualism .There is a close and intimate relation between individual and society. Individual morality is subjective ethics, whereas social ethics is objective within the context of a society.(4) Fourthly, we analyzed the problems concerning the reciprocal relation between individual and society. As far as the issues of this mutual reciprocity are concerned, we analyzed Locke's theory of natural rights, Rousseau's idea of inalienable sovereignty, Kant's problem of Staatsbürger, Mill's idea of inalienable liberty and Hayek's conception of social justice. The state, like any private citizen, is to be governed by the law which defines justice and describes the limits of individual liberty and of governmental authority.(5) Finally, the conception of democracy is evaluated in the light of Mill's and Hayek's theories. Taiwanese political Demagogue usually identify democracy with ”the sovereignty in the hand of people” which means that the ultimate power in society rests in the people themselves. It must be emphasized in this section that the so-called democracy in Taiwan is nothing more than a majoritarian democracy. The majority of a representative assembly may thus well be the supreme power and yet possess unlimited power. Such a governmental representative body would then indeed be concerned with the matters of will of the majority. It would not be concerned with questions about what is right and wrong. As Mill puts it in a very famous passage in his renowned essay On Liberty：”Like other tyrannies, the tyranny of the majority was at first, and is still vulgarly, held in dread, chiefly as operating through the acts of public authorities.”